Low-Energy Fridays: Missed Connections with the Texas Grid  

We like to talk about “the” electric grid, but there are actually multiple interconnected grids in the United States. The main ones are the Western Interconnection, which includes states to the west of a line running from New Mexico to Montana and up into western Canada, and the Eastern Interconnection, which includes most of the rest of the United States and Canada. 

And then there’s Texas. Texans like to go their own way, so perhaps it’s not so surprising that the state maintains its own separate interconnection. This grid is often referred to as “ERCOT,” which stands for its operator, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas. The border of the grid is not exactly the same as the border of Texas itself. El Paso, for example, is part of the Western Interconnection, and small slivers of east and northwest Texas are in the Eastern Interconnection. ERCOT is entirely intra-state and therefore exempt from federal oversight. 

Not everybody is happy about this. Recently, Congressman Greg Casar (D-Texas) introduced the Connect the Grid Act, which would force Texas to join the Eastern Interconnection and subject it to jurisdiction by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). But Casar’s position is hardly universal among Texas representatives. A resolution filed by a group of Texas House members rejects the legislation and calls for ERCOT to remain separate from other interconnects. 

Recent politicization of the matter notwithstanding, interconnection is not a cut-and-dried issue. In theory, interconnection could have substantial benefits for Texas as well as for the rest of the country. Texas produces a lot of energy—installed electric capacity in the ERCOT region is around 145,000 megawatts (MW). By contrast, installed capacity in the neighboring Southwest Power Pool region, which includes all or part of 14 states, is less than 65,000 MW. While the 2021 blackouts still scar the memories of many Texans, the state typically has a surplus of electricity. Interconnection would allow Texas to export that electricity, making money for Texans and helping to reduce electricity prices in other states as well. And being able to more easily draw on resources from outside ERCOT would help maintain reliability during peak periods when demand is sky high. 

But if interconnection forces increased federal control, these advantages will come with a serious drawback. Freedom from overbearing federal oversight has allowed Texas to be more flexible in adapting its grid to changing energy realities. The state has long been number one in wind energy deployment, and last year Texas surpassed California to become the state with the most utility scale solar capacity. There are general worries—including among some environmentalists—that FERC oversight would slow the deployment of new resources. Other states might also oppose forcing Texas to join another interconnection, given the precedent it may set for future interventions. 

Instead of messing with Texas, Congress would be better served by taking smaller steps that could maximize the pros of interconnection while minimizing the cons. For example, some units along the border of the Texas and Eastern region can switch interconnections on short notice, and other smaller links remain between the two grids. 

There are also several big proposals to build high-voltage direct current power lines connecting ERCOT to its neighbors. But they have hit regulatory barriers that could be resolved with changes to the law. Formalizing the validity of these connections in statute and specifying which kinds will not trigger additional federal regulation would enable further interconnection benefits without the big political battle. The point of interconnection is to provide win-win scenarios for electric reliability and the economy. Policy should reflect that.